Our view: Trump’s war on Justice enters alarming phase
Let’s say that you, an everyday American, were under investigation by law enforcement authorities.
Would you publicly berate those conducting the investigation? Would you attack the agency for which they work? Would you demand an immediate end to the inquiry? Would you declare that it was a politically motivated vendetta against you? Would you push to disclose information about a confidential informant? Would you demand a separate investigation into the people investigating you?
Probably not. Few attorneys would recommend such a response. No judge would countenance it.
So why do we allow it of the president of the United States?
Whether it is the Republican partisans who are abetting the president directly, or the many people in and out of government who simply shrug off the president’s behavior, the nation is entering troubled waters.
To put it bluntly, President Trump’s continuing attacks on the Justice Department, the FBI and the office of special counsel Robert Mueller — which have been conducting an essential inquiry into Russian interference in America’s democracy — constitute an assault on the rule of law.
Just as Trump’s constant “fake news” attacks against the media are an effort to deflect negative press, his “witch hunt” drumbeat is an attempt to discredit the Mueller investigation in case its findings are embarrassing (or worse).
Trump’s most recent invective is a charge that a politically motivated FBI spied on his 2016 campaign. The “spygate” charge, based on the FBI’s reported use of a retired professor to approach three Trump campaign aides with suspected Russian connections, is as unfounded as his previous outbursts. The use of such informants is common practice in Justice Department criminal probes.
More important, Trump’s “I hereby demand” tweet that this tactic be investigated is an abuse of his office. A president should never order his Justice Department whom or what to investigate. If a president can politicize law enforcement as a defensive move by demeaning law enforcement officials, he could do so on the offense by using it to go after rivals.
In fact, Trump is already doing a little of both, attacking those who are trying to uncover the truth and insisting that his senior law enforcement appointees become part of the attack. Because of White House pressure, Repub- lican lawmakers (with no Democrats) will sit down with Justice officials today to review sensitive documents related to the investigation.
The great irony, of course, is that if the FBI showed any institutional bias in 2016, it was to Trump’s benefit.
Had the FBI and the Obama administration wanted to play politics, they could have leaked word before November 2016 that Russian interference in the election was extensive, that the investigatory trail was littered with meetings between Russian operatives and Trump aides, that several Trump confidants had long and troubling contacts with the Russian government, or that the FBI was looking into an incendiary claim that Russians had potentially compromising dirt on Trump’s sex life.
In what could only be called a model of discretion and secrecy, virtually none of this came out until after the election.
By contrast, a separate investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server played out like a soap opera over the course of 2016.
That summer, then-FBI Director James Comey took the unusual step of publicly chastising Clinton, calling her “extremely careless” even as he concluded that no criminal charges were warranted. Then just before the election — thinking that Clinton was going to win — he reopened, and re-closed, the inquiry.
Instead of castigating Comey, as Trump did again Wednesday, the president should be sending him thank you notes.